Skip to main content
TrustRadius: an HG Insights Company
TrueNAS

TrueNAS

Overview

What is TrueNAS?

TrueNAS is a network-attached storage featuring all-flash and hybrid storage editions, from iXsystems headquartered in San Jose.

Read more

Learn from top reviewers

Return to navigation

Pricing

View all pricing

What is TrueNAS?

TrueNAS is a network-attached storage featuring all-flash and hybrid storage editions, from iXsystems headquartered in San Jose.

Entry-level set up fee?

  • No setup fee

Offerings

  • Free Trial
  • Free/Freemium Version
  • Premium Consulting/Integration Services

Would you like us to let the vendor know that you want pricing?

65 people also want pricing

Return to navigation

Product Details

What is TrueNAS?

TrueNAS is a universal data platform that enables users to adopt a modern, open-source approach to store and protect their growing data. TrueNAS harnesses the ZFS file system to provide unified storage (File, Block Object, and Apps) with the reliability and performance demanded by virtualization, backup, and many other data-heavy workloads. The TrueNAS CORE edition (formerly FreeNAS) is based on FreeBSD for unified scale-up storage. The TrueNAS SCALE edition is based on Debian Linux for either scale-up or scale-out solutions and offers Linux Containers, VMs (KVM), and scale-out ZFS storage capabilities. Both versions are free to use and work well on a variety of hardware.

TrueNAS Technical Details

Operating SystemsUnspecified
Mobile ApplicationNo

Frequently Asked Questions

TrueNAS is a network-attached storage featuring all-flash and hybrid storage editions, from iXsystems headquartered in San Jose.

TrueNAS starts at $0.

Synology DiskStation, Dell PowerScale, and HPE StoreEasy 1000 Storage are common alternatives for TrueNAS.

The most common users of TrueNAS are from Small Businesses (1-50 employees).
Return to navigation

Comparisons

View all alternatives
Return to navigation

Reviews and Ratings

(47)

Reviews

(1-5 of 11)

Free and Easy to Use

Rating: 10 out of 10
September 14, 2022
Vetted Review
Verified User
TrueNAS
1 year of experience
My organization uses TrueNAS Scale to run file servers for local data storage and backup and host Windows virtual machines. This solution is far superior to manually setting up a Linux server distro with all the packages and configurations for file shares and virtual machines. While I'm accustomed to using the terminal, I welcome the in-browser graphical UI which anyone can use. Remote administration has never been easier for me and my colleagues, with even those unfamiliar with Linux being able to pick up on things very quickly due to the intuitive design. We deploy NAS and server solutions for clients which can be remotely accessed by us for easy maintenance and administration.
  • The ZFS file system is remarkably robust and reliable.
  • Installing applications and virtual machines is easy.
  • Management and creation of permissions and datasets is intuitive.
Cons
  • TrueNAS Scale is less mature than TrueNAS Core
TrueNAS can be used in the majority of situations, whether it be a home NAS, an enterprise storage server, or a school computer lab.

Easy and hassle-free integration

Rating: 10 out of 10
September 15, 2022
AB
Vetted Review
Verified User
TrueNAS
1 year of experience
We are mainly using TrueNAS as a Storage Service Provider for our local network. Storing Data, Sharing Data and processing Data through various channels. The management of ZFS Storage is kept really simple in the UI and can be left untouched when it is all setup.<br>Therefor providing a higher level of management without that big of a learning curve.
  • SMB Shares
  • Video transcoding via GPU and Docker Containers
  • Hosting mulitple fundamental network Services
Cons
  • Heavy loads on the host can interrupt container services heavily. "Always reserved ressources" option might be helpful
Limited by your own capabilities. TrueNAS offers a wide range of possibilities to extend your usage of your appliance / hardware. Centered around a NAS / Storage Device you can implement various sharing services, virtual machines and containerized workloads. So far it handles all our usecases pretty good and you are only limited by what you know about those technologies.A real keeper and a alternative to virtualization focused products.

Amazing NAS

Rating: 10 out of 10
August 09, 2022
HC
Vetted Review
Verified User
TrueNAS
2 years of experience
Currently, we are using TrueNAS as a backup/sync server for our fileserver which replaces the HP tape backup. By doing so we can do snapshots and reduce file recovery time. My next step is to move our fileserver from windows to a second TrueNAS which will be integrated into our Windows AD domain.
  • ZFS filesystem rocks.
  • iSCSI (Internet Small Computer Systems Interface).
  • OS updates.
  • Clean user interface.
  • Snapshots.
Good ISCSI, backup, and storage server. Windows is better at file-level permission control.

TrueNAS for speed, reliability and support.

Rating: 10 out of 10
March 13, 2024
RA
Vetted Review
Verified User
TrueNAS
3 years of experience
I've been using TrueNAS / FreeNAS (in earlier years) for out companies iSCSI Datastore in VMware.
It allows me to make use of older hardware to make secondary / primary NAS /iSCSI Servers.

I also use these servers to do nightly backups of all our VMs. The ability to use TrueNAS Core software
has really helped us out in the last 3 years especially.

We don't have to wait on new expensive hardware to get a new NAS / iSCSI server running. The chip shortage
has made it a very scary proposition to try and acquire new hardware in the face of such a shortage should we
have a failed server. It has let me leverage previous investments in hardware to cover any shortages in storage
availability.
  • iSCSI Datastores for virtualization.
  • NFS store for unix storage or backups over networking.
  • Very fast performance, sometimes outclassing SSD arrays even in NFS.
  • The ZFS filesystem has given use much greater flexibility.
  • Using their newer servers we could in theory scale to any height of required storage.
Cons
  • Better explanations of what a 'jail' is.
  • Update the UI to support easier creation or clearer creation of new arrays.
  • More plugin integrations.
  • The ability to run scripts to copy things locally such as to a usb RDX hard drive.
  • Proper USB 3.0 support.
Their free TrueNAS Core has been an incredible boon. Using older hardware to create a great lab / array TrueNAS is amazing. NFS Targets for running VEEAM backups over a 10Gb network it worked amazing. Using the ISCSI for datastores in VMware worked amazing as well. I do hope they put some more work into the Virtual Machine UI. I don't know that I'd use TrueNAS to host VMs in a production environment.

TrueNAS Core: Certainly Value for Money.

Rating: 10 out of 10
August 09, 2022
je
Vetted Review
Verified User
TrueNAS
1 year of experience
I have been using TrueNAS Core at home now for the past 12 months, as means to manage my business data and as a home media server. To be honest it took me a little bit of time to get my head around it, but once I understood the fundamentals the rest was like learning to bake a cake. I have an old HP Proliant dual processor box which handles it very well, I stacked it full of SSD and away I went. TrueNAS Core just made itself at home, no glitches and of it went. I love it, and I love that it is free more than anything else.
  • Security is its best function. By utilising the jail system.
  • Encryption throughout the entire system. Most diverse.
  • It's not built on Linux.
Cons
  • More functionality for video cards and hardware rendering
  • Have a TrueNAS Core GUI
  • Better HELP options.
I was previous an unRAID user. I found that unRAID users were particularly unhelpful and I was very frustrated with it. Someone suggested that I try TrueNAS Core for my media server needs. I installed it and found that it worked well and graphically displayed very well how my storage pools were coping with space, my various processor cores etc basically how my server was functioning which unRAID didn't do particularly well at the time.
Return to navigation